Loading document...
The site comprises six fields and an existing cottage and associated stables to the rear, situated on the western side of the A36 Sloc Road as it passes through Lingague. The site extends to approximately 20 acres and is described in the application form as "residential". The site actually comprises mostly agricultural open space with a small residential curtilage in the centre, of 0.6 acres.
The existing house is a traditional cottage which has been extended on each side - to the left with a two storey extension echoing the style and dimensions of the main core, and to the right a single storey garage with two garage doors.
The dwelling is 400m from the main road. Between the dwelling and the road are two properties - Kirkle Farm and Kirkle Cottage which are close together and a barn which sits between these two dwellings and the application site.
The site lies within a wider area of High Landscape Value and Scenic Significance on the Town and Country Planning (Development Plan) Order 1982. On the draft Southern Area Plan the site lies within an area of land not designated for development. There is a site of archaeological interest in the field to the south west. On the draft Landscape Character Assessment the site is within The Southern Uplands where the following advice is provided:
"The overall strategy for the area is to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the open and exposed character of the moorland, its uninterrupted skyline and the panoramic views, its sense of tranquility and remoteness and its wealth of cultural heritage features" and key views include "open and expansive panoramic views out to sea and over the southern portion of the Island" and "distant views in some areas enclosed by the surrounding peaks".
The draft Planning Policy Statement on Landscape Character states:
The overall strategy for the protection and enhancement of the Uplands Landscape Character Type is to conserve and enhance: the predominantly open and exposed character of the moorland hills and mountain summits; the generally uninterrupted skyline and panoramic views across the lower slopes and plains towards the sea; the strong sense of tranquility and remoteness; and the distinctive features of cultural heritage and nature conservation interest.
Key landscape planning considerations in relation to the protection and enhancement of this Landscape Character Type are as follows:-
Proposed is the replacement of the existing house and stables with a new dwelling. The existing dwelling has a floor area of 247 sq m, a main front elevation of 8.8m extended to the right with the two storey annex, to 14.6m with the garage on the right taking it to 21.5m. The highest part of the existing dwelling is 7.9m with almost a third of the frontage being single storey.
The proposed dwelling will have four floors of accommodation and is modern and angular in appearance. The widest part of the dwelling is over 29m long and is the front to back depth of the dwelling. The frontage facing towards the road is mainly 21m wide although the ground floor is wider than this. The property will be 12m tall at its highest point. Overall the floor area of the proposed dwelling is 1081 sq m.
The dwelling will be finished in render and vertical timber cladding with a combination of flat and sloping roofing finished in zinc and grass, stainless steel handrails and aluminium framed windows generally with a horizontal emphasis.
The appropriate policy to be applied to this proposal is Housing Policy 14 which states:
"Where a replacement dwelling is permitted, it must not be substantially different to the existing in terms of siting and size, unless changes of siting or size would result in an overall environmental improvement; the new building should therefore generally be sited on the "footprint" of the existing, and should have a floor area which is not more than 50% greater than that of the original building (floor areas should be measured externally and should not include attic space or outbuildings). Generally the design of the new building should be in accordance with Policies 2-7 of the present Planning Circular 3/91 (which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement). Exceptionally, permission may be granted for buildings of innovative, modern design where this is of high quality and would not result in adverse visual impact; designs should incorporate the re-use of such stone and slate as are still in place on the site, and in generally, new fabric should be finished to match the materials of the original building.
Consideration may be given to proposals which result in a larger dwelling where which involves the replacement of an existing dwelling of poor form with one of more traditional character, or where, by its design and or siting, there would be less visual impact."
PA 11/00840/B - Erection of replacement dwelling Status - Pending Consideration
PA 08/00332/B - Erection of replacement stable block Status - Permitted
PA 08/00108/B - Erection of a replacement dwelling Status - permitted
PA 07/01109/B - Alterations and erection of extensions Status - Refused
PA 02/00797/B - Creation of wildlife pond Status - Permitted
PA 97/01063/B - Erection of five stables and hay store, Kirkill, Ballakilpheric, Rushen. Status - Permitted
PA 97/01149/B - Conversion of garage into living accommodation, Kirkill, Ballakilpheric, Rushen. Status - Application Permitted on Review
PA 95/00592/B - Approval in principle to convert garage into living accommodation and erect barn, Kirkill, Ballakilpheric, Rushen. Status - Permitted
PA 90/00374/B - Alterations and extensions, Cheston, formerly Upper Kirkill, Rushen. Status - Refused
PA 88/04427/B - Alterations and extensions to form extra living accommodation and garage, Upper Kirkhill Farm, Lingague, Rushen Status - Permitted
PA 87/04755/B - Alterations and extensions to provide additional living accommodation, double garage and porch, Upper Kirkill Farm, Linague, Rushen. Status - Application Permitted on Review
Of particular relevance are the two most recent applications for the replacement dwelling and the alterations and extensions - PAs 07/1109 and 08/0108. The first application proposed alterations to the front in the form of replacement of the garage doors with patio doors and a rear extension which
extended the property by 30%. This application was refused for reasons relating to the appearance of the patio doors.
PA 08/108 proposed a replacement dwelling whose front elevation was 14.4m - similar to the two storey element of the existing dwelling, a small recessed single storey annex on the right hand side and a rear two storey extension. The overall floor area was 404 sq m - an increase of 70% of the existing floor area. That proposed dwelling was to be 8.1m in height. This application was permitted but not implemented.
Highways and Traffic Division raise no objection to the application
Manx National Heritage recommend that the application does not comply with the provisions of HP 14 by virtue of its height and size and the design is very similar to one proposed on Douglas Head (PA 11/0407) which is a completely different context to this site. They consider the existing cottage to be one typical of a vernacular cottage which has been altered and extended over time.
Rushen Parish Commissioners recommend that the application should be refused on the basis that the new dwelling is far larger than the existing, its style and design are out of keeping with the area and there are no other properties in the area which could be considered to be anything like this.
A resident of Douglas has indicated that the whole of the site is not residential as indicated in the plans and that the design and size are not in accordance with policy.
The proposed dwelling nestles relatively comfortably in the landscape, part way up the backdrop of The Carmanes. What is proposed is out of proportion with the existing property, which has already been altered and extended albeit some time (over twenty years ago) ago. The proposed is almost three and a half times larger than the size of the existing dwelling and garage and half as tall again.
The building is very modern and one which would sit better within an urban context rather than one which is much more natural and wild with little in the way of planting or vegetation - the "predominantly open and exposed character of the moorland hills and mountain summits" referred to in the draft Landscape Character Assessment - "the generally uninterrupted skyline and panoramic views across the lower slopes and plains towards the sea; the strong sense of tranquillity and remoteness" reflects this. This Assessment recommends the consideration of the protection of this character through the principles that, inter alia, "Housing and business development would be out of place within the predominantly open, exposed, and visually-sensitive Upland landscapes" and "Any buildings which are deemed necessary should avoid exposed or visually-prominent locations, and should reflect local building materials and styles. The fact that a similar property (all of the roofing in this other application is flat whereas there are sloping mono-pitched roofing proposed in this current application) was proposed in a built up area in Douglas illustrates perhaps a lack of understanding of context.
It is suggested that the proposed development would fall foul of both of these principles and would be out of keeping with the natural, predominantly open and exposed landscape. HP 14 seeks to protect the countryside through the control of development which would be out of place and by restricting the size of new development in this way. The approved scheme of replacement introduced a new appearance of dwelling which was arguably grander that that which presently exists but which did away with the unfortunate elements of the existing cottage and replaced it with something which in massing terms was not too dissimilar to the existing. What is now proposed is so different, in design, scale, massing, height and character as to be detrimental to the setting of the site and the character of the area in general. The design of the new dwelling is of a landmark style in a landscape where the buildings should nestle comfortably rather than stand out.
The residential curtilage is also far larger than is appropriate in view of the existing curtilage and the impact which domestication of such a natural landscape may have.
In the contemporaneous application for this site – PA 11/0839 – Department of Environment, Food and Agriculture indicate that the ponds within the site may accommodate frogs and this should be taken into account in any development. Should the application be permitted then this should be addressed by way of a condition.
The local authority, Rushen Parish Commissioners is, by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2005, paragraph 6 (5) (d), considered an "interested person" and as such should be afforded party status.
Manx National Heritage is a statutory authority and should be afforded party status in this instance.
The Department of Transport Highways and Traffic Division is now part of the Department of Infrastructure of which the planning authority is part. As such, the Highways and Traffic Division cannot be afforded party status in this instance.
The resident of Douglas is not directly affected by the proposal and should not be afforded party status in this case.
Recommended Decision: Refused
Date of Recommendation: 25.07.2011
C : Conditions for approval N : Notes attached to conditions R : Reasons for refusal
R 1. The proposed dwelling by virtue particularly of its design and massing but also due to its size, would be strikingly out of character with the landscape in which it would sit and thus contrary to the provisions of Housing Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan.
R 2. The site defined in red, which is described in the application form as "residential" includes a substantial amount of land which is not presently residential curtilage and if treated as such, would or could transform what is presently open natural land into domesticised and inappropriately landscaped
garden, with the features and elements associated therewith and some permissible under the Town and Country Planning (Permitted Development) Order 2005 which would be out of keeping with the area.
I confirm that this decision accords with the appropriate Government Circular delegating functions to Director of Planning and Building Control / Development Control Manager.
Decision Made : Refused Date : 26/7/11
Signed : [Signature] Michael Gallagher Director of Planning and Building Control Delete as appropriate
Signed : Jennifer Chance Development Control Manager
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
